Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

No. I never said that. That also doesn't change a thing about what I said.

If they aren't aren't buying new consoles, nor new games, the money of the budget gamers never reaches the industry. They might as well not exist to the industry. Only the retailers make any profit from them and they aren't responsible for the development of new games.

It doesn't matter to the publishers whether the gamers that spend $20 a month on used games will only buy a new game every 3 months. For them, that is profit already. Not a cent spent on used games goes to the publishers and studios. It all goes to Gamestop and other retailers.

Even if people buy 1 new game every six months rather than 10 used games a month, it's more beneficial for the publishers that way.

As long as content creators support Flash, it will still exist. Newgrounds, as an example, still has a large community of flash artists and programmers, which regularly provide animations and games for free.

When these sites make the transition, Flash may die. Until then, it may be used significantly less, but it will still be there.

This announcement sounds perfectly reasonable to me--not having plugins in the Metro browser closes a lot of security holes and eliminates crap like Flash that's proprietary, hurts performance, etc. It's a competitive move that raises the bar for other browsers to become more secure and stop supporting things that people don't want.

Emphasis mine.

Speak for yourself. I regularly watch flash animations, play flash games and use web apps made in flash. If I were one of the creators, I wouldn't be very happy either. It should be my choice to make, not Microsoft's. Limiting my choice is not a benefit.

Would it really? Foxconn has been target of controversy for quite some time, but iPhones still sell very well.

By censoring this game, not only they triggered Streisand effect and brought the problems about iPhone production to attention just the same, but also made the iPhone look like a restrictive platform for developers once again.

Besides, do you really think iPhone buyers really actually care about it's production problems enough to not to buy them?

I regularly use "cloud stuff" like Google Docs and the Aviary apps, as well as Dropbox. That means I can access and edit my documents everywhere I can find a barely decent computer with internet connection. As well as download them everytime I need.

What is boring for some people is fun for other people. Wandering around, exploring the game world, hunting and such is what made RDR interesting for so many people. It wasn't just a western game, it was a full blown wild west world. In it's particular case, I think there is a considerable amount of people that didn't buy it for the story, but for the sandbox world. So, it doesn't matter whether they finish the game, because it doesn't mean they didn't enjoy it.

While I do believe there is a lot of unnecessary padding in games, not everything would be benefited by being cut shorter. Hell, there are even people that like grinding, so it's really something to be thought in a case by case basis.

If I'm not mistaken, Alan Wake does that, downright to mimicking the TV series intro format. A few games also display story summaries as text in the loading screens, but I agree that it is missing from most of them.

Their trademark is "Elder Scrolls". While I think Mojang's "Scrolls", even as a fantasy game, is too generic to be trademarked, it is not violating Bethesda's trademark. They are claiming they own the individual words of their trademark, even though they are common english words, and that's clearly absurd.